CTNF 18/916,502 CTNF 97453 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-01-aia AIA 07-03-01-r-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claims 1-20 are pending. Drawings 06-36 AIA The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first magnets, the second magnets, and first to the sixth surfaces must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 10 objected to because of the following informalities: claim 10 depends on claim 1 and surface counting in claim 10 starts from 4. In this Office action, claim 10 is interpreted as depending on claim 7 that already includes three introduced surfaces . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1, 2, 5-7, 11-12 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kou et al. (CN 102594086 A) in view of Raminosoa et al. (US 20170054335 A1) . PNG media_image1.png 337 580 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Kou discloses a rotor (fig. 6) comprising: first magnets (first magnets, annotated fig. 6) defining gaps (space for the second magnets) between the first magnets; a housing (housing, annotated fig. 6) comprising retaining structures configured to apply first forces that are directed radially outward against the first magnets to hold the first magnets against the housing (see abstract: “Main permanent magnet and auxiliary permanent magnet along the circumference direction are tightly arranged and fixed on the air gap side surface of the rotor.”); and second magnets (second magnets, annotated fig. 6) that are positioned within the gaps such that the first magnets are configured to apply a second force that is directed radially outward against the second magnets to hold the second magnets against the housing (the circumferential overlap between the two magnets allow the first magnets to press the second magnets against the housing). Kou does not disclose: the housing comprising retaining structures configured to apply first forces that are directed radially outward against the first magnets to hold the first magnets against the housing. PNG media_image2.png 261 411 media_image2.png Greyscale Raminosoa discloses a retaining structure (a matching dovetail protrusion and recess; see fig. 4) that robustly attaches the magnet (22) to the magnet housing (26) and prevents the magnet from sliding against the surface of the housing (see para [0005]: “It would further be desirable for such inserts to be assembled with the salient rotor in a mechanically robust way that can withstand centrifugal forces at high speeds, while minimizing the mass that is added to the rotor.”) For robust retention of the first magnet on the housing, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the housing and the first magnets to engage mechanically as taught by Raminosoa resulting in: the housing comprising retaining structures configured to apply first forces that are directed radially outward against the first magnets to hold the first magnets against the housing. Regarding claim 2, Kou as modified by Raminosoa in claim 1 discloses the rotor of claim 1, Kou further discloses: wherein each of the second magnets includes a convex surface (convex surface, annotated fig. 6), and wherein each of the first magnets includes a concave surface (concave surface, annotated fig. 6) that is configured to apply the second force to the convex surface (implied). Regarding claim 5, Kou as modified by Raminosoa in claim 1 discloses the rotor of claim 1, wherein the housing is radially outward from the first magnets (see annotated fig. 6). Regarding claim 6, Kou as modified by Raminosoa in claim 1 discloses the rotor of claim 1, wherein the housing is radially outward from the second magnets (see annotated fig. 6). Regarding claim 7, Kou discloses the rotor of claim 1, wherein each of the retaining structures comprises a first surface, a second surface, and a third surface, wherein the first surface forms a first acute angle with the second surface and the third surface forms a second acute angle with the second surface (see the dovetail recess in fig. 4, Raminosoa. The triangular shape has three sides, the long base is the second surface and the two equal sides are surfaces 1 and 3; see also the retaining structure in figs. 5-7). Regarding claim 11, Kou discloses an aircraft comprising an electric motor (intended application) that- as shown regarding claim 1 in view of Raminosoa- further comprises a rotor, the rotor comprising: first magnets defining gaps between the first magnets; a housing comprising retaining structures configured to apply first forces that are directed radially outward against the first magnets to hold the first magnets against the housing; and second magnets that are positioned within the gaps such that the first magnets are configured to apply a second force that is directed radially outward against the second magnets to hold the second magnets against the housing (these limitations were discussed regarding claim 1). Regarding claim 12, Kou as modified by Raminosoa in claim 1 discloses the aircraft of claim 11, wherein each of the second magnets includes a convex surface, and wherein each of the first magnets includes a concave surface that is configured to apply the second force to the convex surface (discussed regarding claim 2). Regarding claim 15, Kou as modified by Raminosoa in claim 1 discloses the aircraft of claim 11, wherein the housing is radially outward from the first magnets (see annotated fig. 6). Regarding claim 16, Kou as modified by Raminosoa in claim 1 discloses the aircraft of claim 11, wherein the housing is radially outward from the second magnets (see annotated fig. 6). Regarding claim 17, Kou discloses the aircraft of claim 11, wherein each of the retaining structures comprises a first surface, a second surface, and a third surface, wherein the first surface forms a first acute angle with the second surface and the third surface forms a second acute angle with the second surface (discussed regarding claim 7; see the dovetail recess in fig. 4, Raminosoa. The triangular shape has three sides, the long base is the second surface and the two equal sides are surfaces 1 and 3) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 3, 4, 10, 13, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kou et al. (CN 102594086 A) in view of Raminosoa et al. (US 20170054335 A1) and further in view of Tanaka K. (US 20220149684 A1) . Regarding claim 3, Kou as modified by Raminosoa in claim 1 discloses the rotor of claim 2, wherein the convex surface comprises a first flat surface and a second flat surface that forms an obtuse angle with the first flat surface . Kou as modified does not disclose: the first flat surface and the second flat surface form an obtuse angle. PNG media_image3.png 310 487 media_image3.png Greyscale Tanaka teaches an axial and a radial rotor for an electric machine wherein the rotor comprises a first and a second magnets (see annotated fig. 12, below) and the first and second flat surfaces of each of the magnets form an obtuse angle. As motivation for this arrangement, Tanaka states: “With this configuration, since the first magnet 610 and the second magnet 620 are fit with each other such that their centers of gravity are made the linear shape, it is possible to suppress the first magnet 610 and the second magnet 620 from deviating in the direction of the rotating shaft 200a. It is possible to suppress a magnetic characteristic from being deteriorated.”, (see para [0066]). To suppress deterioration of a magnetic characteristics, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radial sides of the first and the second magnets and adopt the configuration as taught by Tanaka resulting in: the first flat surface and the second flat surface form an obtuse angle. Regarding claim 4, Kou as modified by Raminosoa in claim 1 discloses the rotor of claim 2 and Kou as further modified in claim 3 by Tanaka discloses wherein the concave surface is formed by a first flat surface and a second flat surface that forms an obtuse angle with the first flat surface (see the discussion regarding claim 3 and the annotated fig. 12). Regarding claim 10, Kou as modified by Raminosoa in claim 1 discloses the rotor of claim 1 and further modified in claim 3 by Tanaka discloses, wherein each of the second magnets comprises a fourth surface, a fifth surface, and a sixth surface (see side surfaces 4, 5, 6 and the angles between the sides in annotated portion of fig. 3, below), PNG media_image4.png 435 379 media_image4.png Greyscale wherein the fourth surface contacts the housing, the fifth surface forms a first obtuse angle with the fourth surface, and the sixth surface forms a second obtuse angle with the fourth surface (see annotated fig. 3, above- the housing portion added by Examiner for an outer rotor). Regarding claim 13, Kou as modified by Raminosoa and Tanaka discloses the aircraft of claim 12, wherein the convex surface comprises a first flat surface and a second flat surface that forms an obtuse angle with the first flat surface (the additional limitation discussed regarding claim 3). Regarding claim 14, Kou as modified by Raminosoa and Tanaka discloses the aircraft of claim 12, wherein the concave surface is formed by a first flat surface and a second flat surface that forms an obtuse angle with the first flat surface (the additional limitation discussed regarding claim 4). Regarding claim 20, Kou as modified by Raminosoa and Tanaka discloses the aircraft of claim 11, wherein each of the second magnets comprises a fourth surface, a fifth surface, and a sixth surface, wherein the fourth surface contacts the housing, the fifth surface forms a first obtuse angle with the fourth surface, and the sixth surface forms a second obtuse angle with the fourth surface (these limitations were discussed regarding claim 10) . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 8-9 and 18-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 07-43-03 AIA As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a). Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. DE 102012022868 A1 teaches a dove tail retaining structure, see figs. 1-2. WO 2007074036 A1 teaches another magnet retaining structure, see figs. 3-4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MASOUD VAZIRI whose telephone number is (571)272-2340. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-5pm EST.. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, the examiner’s supervisor, SEYE IWARERE can be reached on (571) 270-5112. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MASOUD VAZIRI/Examiner, Art Unit 2834 /OLUSEYE IWARERE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/916,502 Page 2 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/916,502 Page 3 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/916,502 Page 4 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/916,502 Page 5 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/916,502 Page 6 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/916,502 Page 7 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/916,502 Page 8 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/916,502 Page 9 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/916,502 Page 10 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/916,502 Page 11 Art Unit: 2834
Prosecution Insights